CANTON COUNCIL TO UNDERGO A "MAJOR" SHAKEUP?

From what the SCPR is assessing and hearing about the upcoming Canton City Council (Council) races, the city may be about to experience a major shift in the role that Council has been playing in city government.

Up to now The Report believes that William J. Healy, II has been able to dominate Canton's government by more or less playing a divide and conquer game with what appears to be a somewhat of a Smuckler, Cirelli and Hawk (with lone Republican Mark Butterworth lurking in the background) faction in Council against the rest of Council.

Despite the Smuckler led opposition on various issues, Healy has been able to pretty much get his way with Council.

However, that may be about to change with the November elections.

Out for sure will be Smuckler (who ran against Healy for mayor in the May Democratic Primary), 5th Ward Councilman Terry Prater (who got a Stark County Democratic Party political appointment to a job at the Stark County Board of Elections) and 9th Ward Councilman Brian Horner who decided not to run for reelection.

Out maybe could be 8th Ward Councilman Mark Butterworth, Councilman Joe Cole (whom the SCPR projects as possibly losing his at-large seat to former Councilwoman Rosemary Diamond.

Republican Butterworth has been a disappointment to many, including the SCPR, in his laid-back manner who appears to get intimidated rather easily either by the Council process, in general, various councilpersons and/or the Healy administration.  Democrats have fielded a strong candidate in Attorney Edmond Mack.

Butterworth narrowly defeated Democrat (the then incumbent) Karl "Butch" Kraus two years ago.  The Report believes that Mack is a stronger candidate than Kraus and is likely to oust Butterworth this time around mainly because Butterworth has not been able to make a name for himself as a innovative force on Council.  His try at interesting Council to give Canton voters an opportunity to restructure Canton government into a charter form of government got squashed quickly by the work of Councilman Tom West (chairman of Judiciary) in combo with the Healy administration.

Joe Cole is another incumbent councilman who has been less than inspiring.  Look for Cole to trail veteran Councilwoman Mary Cirelli and the son of former Canton mayor Charles Babcock and his widow (now deceased herself) Mary (a long term and councilwoman in her own right), Jimmy Babcock, and thereby possibly providing an opportunity for Republican Rosemary Diamond to slip in as replacement for Cole.

Accordingly, the SCPR projects that Canton Council could (and will, the cases of Fisher and Morris) have the following new faces come January 1, 2013.

If the SCPR is correct or even partially correct by the questionable additions of Diamond, Babcock and Mack to the automatics (Fisher and Morris), the question becomes: what will the changes bring to the balance of Council and the balance of power between Council and the Healy administration.

The SCPR projects that Councilpersons Fisher, Morris and Mack will comprise a energized "young turks" faction on Council which will force the rest of Council to become more vigorous in assuming a more dynamic role in fashioning and directing Canton's future.

Fisher, in particular, seems to the SCPR has the potential to devise creative legislation that is likely to draw scores of more Cantonians into participating with Council and the Healy administration in the ongoing effort to restore Canton to some semblance of her former self.

Morris appears to The Report to have the grit to resist the powers that be on Council and, of course, the Healy administration, when appropriate and necessary to work with other innovators to get Canton steered on a productive course.

Mack, if elected, has already shown that he has a desire to be an idea man (i.e. his proposal to accelerate the demolition of vacant buildings) who is likely to turn heads as a freshman councilperson.

The SCPR can see the potential development of a Fisher, Morris, Mack, Cirelli, Hawk and Diamond lose coalition on some important legislative initiatives to make things very interesting on Council.

Such a development could put Council President Allen Schulman on the spot.  For he is the tie breaker vote on Council.

Of all the possible newcomers, only Jimmy Babcock is an automatic for the Healy administration.

The 2011 Canton Council elections could be the most important ever in the modern era of Canton politics and government.

(MULTIPLE VIDEOS) LAKE RESIDENTS CONVINCE TOWNSHIP TRUSTEES TO CHANGE MIND - SORT OF - ON DRILLING ISSUE NEAR UNIONTOWN SUPERFUND SITE. IS IT NOW "KATY-BAR-THE-DOOR" WITH THE TRUSTEES?

REQUEST FOR A RESOLUTION ON ANTI-DRILLING NEXT TO IEL:  DENIED

A group of difference makers? 

Such is how the SCPR would define a group of Lake Township residents (pictured above) who went to township hall last night to press Lake trustees (Arnold, Erb and Stoll) to pass a resolution to stop oil and gas well drilling across the road from the Uniontown Industrial Excess Landfill.

The lead person at the meeting wss long time Concerned Citizens for Lake Township member Terry Witsaman.  He put the Lake Township trustees on the spot in several ways at this regular meeting of the trustees.

First, he highlighted that Lake/Uniontown area citizens could expect to get no help (in a preventative sense of help) from county or township government on the anti-drillers concern that the Kasich controlled Ohio Department of Natural Resources - ODNR - (referring to the unabashedly pro-drilling Republican Governor John Kasich) will grant a permit for drilling next to the IEL site.

Second, he smoked out Trustee Ellis Erb as having an interest in drilling and therefore implying that he is sitting back and doing nothing to help stop the issuance of the permit across the road from IEL.

As far as the SCPR is concerned, the anti-drilling folks hurt themselves with the trustees and bystanders in the assembled crowd (who were at township hall on other issues) in more or less shouting Erb down as he endeavored to explain his situation.  At the end of this blog, The Report has inserted a video of Erb saying to the SCPR what he was "prevented?" by the anti-drilling/fracking crowd from having his say in response to Witsaman.

Third, he elicited an initial response from the trustees that they could/would do nothing to help affected Uniontown citizens because they said Ohio law forbade them from doing so.

Here is a video of the exchange between Witsaman and the trustees (Arnold and Erb; Trustee Stoll uttered nary a word during the entire discussion on the topic).



If the trustees thought that the Chris Borello-led effort was going to sit down and shut up on the "woe is us - we'd like to help, but we can't" maneuver, they had better think again.

And they did!

By the end of the evening the trustees actually passed a resolution to send a letter to the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and the ODNR (Ohio Department of Natural Resources) expressing trustee concern about the proposed drilling of a well proximate to the IEL.

Mind you, it is not exactly what the CCLT and friends wanted, but it was quite an accomplishment given the trustees dug-in attitude at the beginning of the meeting.

Next up for on the "next to the IEL" drilling issue was Citizen Ruth Katzenmayer.

Katzenmayer pointed out to the trustees that what is proposed with the permit before the ODNR is a rehash of a 1989 attempt as reported on September 29, 1989 in the Akron Beacon Journal.

She points out the concerns of the EPA (she left a copy of the ABJ article with the trustees), to wit:

Another excerpt reveals a disturbing statement by an ODNR ('that agency") official (no guarantees):

Here is the video of Citizen Katzenmayer making her case that the trustees  move off their intransigence:



The trustees' reaction?   "All of you folks contact the EPA and ODNR."  (see the video below)



Answer:  "We already have."

Trustee Arnold (who is the Lake Board of Trustees president) has to be thinking to himself:  "Are these people ever going to go away?"

Answer:  Borello et al are never, ever going away.

Arnold then returns to his "there's nothing we can do" argument in response to Uniontown resident Norma Boldt, to wit:



THE TRUSTEES RELENT - PASS A RESOLUTION

While it does not go nearly far enough for the "druthers" of the anti-drillers, Trustee President John Arnold finally gets it and realizes that he has to do something to satisfy these folks.

So out-of-the-blue he seizes the initiative to offer a resolution (which unanimously passes) to send the EPA and ODNR a letter expressing concerns to them about drilling next to the Uniontown dump.



At this point in the dialogue, a second anti-driller group "shout-down" of Erb occurred as he tried once again to explain his situation in terms of any leases he may have with the drillers and the income he may or may not be getting.

Next up was Elizabeth Dixon who The Report sees as taking a leadership role (along with Borello) in fighting drilling and horizontal fracturing wherever it may occur.

In the next video she wants to know how it is that Hartville and Plain Township have passed resolutions banning fracking on village/township owned property and the Lake trustees are not willing to follow suit?

As you will see, she gets emotional to the point of saying that she would be willing to go back to the horse 'n buggy days to get away from the need for oil and natural gas.



Really?

If such is her prescription for a cure, she certainly would lose a lot of the solidly 21st century folks who support anti-fracking, no?

Terry and Catherine Ball of Hartville were up next.  They moved to the Hartville area for an idyllic life.  Now, to hear them tell it, with the onset of well drilling and fracking, the idyllic life is no more.

Moreover, Trustee Arnold responded by implying (the SCPR's interpretation) that the Plain Township trustees (most likely focusing on Trustee Louis Giavasis, a lead anti-fracking Stark County elected official [Trustee Haws voted against the Plain resolutions]) that in passing its resolutions (calling for a moratorium of fracking and banning fracking on township property) was grandstanding on the issue and that he (Arnold) is not about to follow suit.

Here is a video on the Ball/Arnold exchance:



The SCPR in a general sort of way admires the work of Chris Borello.

However, The Report is disappointed with the way her followers shouted down Trustee Ellis Erb twice when he tried to explain his situation and position in the give and take between the anti-drillers/frackers and the trustees.

After the meeting, yours truly sought Erb out to afford him an opportunity to have his say.  And here is the video of him having his say:



A FINAL NOTE

The question arises whether or not the anti-drillers/frackers were satisfied with the results of the meeting with Lake trustees on Monday night.

The SCPR was impressed how they forged on until the trustees convinced them that they were being heard in passing the resolution directing that a letter of concern be sent to the EPA and ODNR

The Report doubts that the anti-drillers/frackers can achieve any more with the Lake trustees in terms of additional resolutions.

But you can bet that in a figurative sort of way "they will die trying."

Indication of support for The Report's prediction of a continuing effort was forthcoming from organizing leader Elizabeth Dixon in the following post-meeting interview:

AN UNFAVORABLE ZEIGLER SETTLEMENT COULD MEAN POLITICAL DEFEAT FOR COMMISSIONERS BERNABEI & FERGUSON?

Just about everybody in Stark County government just wants Stark County Treasurer to be gone! gone!! gone!!!

A week ago today, as we media types waited as a Stark County commissioners executive session meeting with Stark County Ross Rhodes et al  dragged on and on and on, yours truly figured out what this session was all about:  "a discussion of the way to reach a settlement with Stark County Treasurer Gary D. Zeigler to get him out of office.

Conventional thinking is that as long as Zeigler continues as Stark County Treasurer as he was when his employee and then Chief Deputy Vince Frustaci is believed to have stolen $2.96 million (he admitted in his guilty plea to having stolen $2.46 millon) in Stark County taxpayer dollars, Issue 29 (a county sales tax of 0.5% proposal) has no chance of passing.

The SCPR agrees with Stark County Prosecutor John Fererro's assessment as reported by Kelli Young in Treasurer’s presence in county government weighs on sales tax vote, The Repository, October 5, 2011.

Ferrero expressed doubt that whether or not Zeigler is present as county treasurer as being a material factor in whether or not the new tax will pass.

Should the county agree to a settlement with Zeigler which results in his resignation from office, the major factor will not not be a groundswell of support for the tax issue.

The larger factor, the SCPR believes, is how the public would perceive the favorability/unfavorability of the specific terms of any such settlement and the fallout on the two November, 2012 commissioner races.

Commissioners Tom Bernabei and Pete Ferguson are up for re-election in 2012.  So far, neither they nor any prospective opponents have taken out petitions from the Stark County Board of Elections.

Whether or not they (especially Bernabei) seek re-election could hinge on whether or not the sales tax passes in the first place.  Presuming that it does pass and both decide to run, then any settlement could play significantly in their chances for re-election.

The Report believes that it is highly unlikely that a settlement can be reached before November 8th and even if it does, it will take time for the Stark County voting public to absorb and reflect on the terms of the settlement, and determine whether or not the commissioner adequately protected the Stark County taxpayer interest in negotiating a settlement.

Such is the "tightrope" that the commissioners, and more specifically Commissioners Bernabei and Ferguson, are walking on as they consider whether or not they can abide settling with Zeigler.

In any event, Zeigler, of course, has no chance whatsoever of being re-elected should negotiations totally breakdown.  Already waiting in the wings is former Treasurer Alex Zumbar who Zeigler's attorney has described as a usurper treasurer for the time he served after Stark County commissioners removed Zeigler from office in 2010.

Whether or not Zeigler serves to September, 2013 (the statutory end to his term) is unknown as this blog is written, but the SCPR is confident that Zeigler's successor will be Zumbar.

A Zeigler resignation will likely mean that commissioners will be appointing an interim treasurer if Zeigler resigns and The Report believes that the choice will be Zumbar.

The Report doubts that Stark's Democrats will put up a candidate to oppose Zumbar, that's how well taken Stark County officialdom (Democrats included) were with Zumbar for the time that he served as Stark County treasurer.

ARE THERE STARK COUNTIANS DUMB ENOUGH TO BUY A POLITICAL SIGN?

Yesterday, the SCPR received a campaign email from the "We Are Ohio" folks who are asking Ohioans to repeal Senate Bill 5 (the collective bargaining reform bill) passed by the Ohio General Assembly several months ago.

Yours truly always signs up for both sides of a given issue for them to send the materials to the SCPR that they send to their partisans so as to keep in touch with what the political propaganda is.

This particular email was one of the stupidest pieces of campaign appeals yours truly has ever seen. 

How's that?

The writer (who says he is a volunteer for "We Are Ohio" (the SCPR is highly skeptical of that assertion; certainly one who appears this stupid ought to be paid for acting stupid) is trying to sell recipients on the notion that Issue 2 campaign signs are in short supply and that the only way they can guarantee getting a sign is to make a $25 campaign contribution.

Here is some of the actual text from the email:

Yard signs are in short supply, and we have been saving them for the volunteers who come out and make phone calls and knock on doors to spread the word about how Senate Bill 5, now Issue 2 on the ballot, is unsafe, unfair, and hurts us all.

... 

Our last yard sign order is already with our print shop, but I called them on Friday, and they assured me that I can add to our last order for a few more days. That's why I'm excited to tell you about a very special promotion: Yard Sign Sunday.

If you contribute $25 or more to the campaign through the links below, we will not only GUARANTEE you receive one of the very limited number of yard signs we have remaining, but we'll also ship the sign directly to your door.

...

P.S. If you're unable to contribute at this time, don't worry! CLICK HERE or go to weareohio.com/volunteer to sign up to volunteer. If you complete two volunteer activities in the next 10 days, you will get a yard sign for free! 

Undoubtedly, some die-hard supporters will play the game and ante up $25.  But probably very few.  And certainly those who do will not being doing so because they truly believe yard signs are in short supply.

You can bet your bottom dollar that when the campaign gets down to its final phase, the "We Are Ohio" folks will be begging people to take "free" signs and find a roadside home for them!

OCCUPY WALL STREET COMING TO STARK COUNTY AS #OccupyCanton! WILL MAYOR HEALY DEMAND TO BE THE "KEYNOTE" SPEAKER?

UPDATE AT 07:30 AM

Stark County Commissioner Janet Creighton has been commenting here and there since February of this year as to how apathetic Stark Countians are when it comes to participating in the decision making process of Stark County local government.

It has been frustrating to her and fellow Commissioners Thomas Bernabei and Pete Ferguson, for all of them, as they have fanned out into Stark County and 21 community meetings in their endeavor to get citizen input into what the commissioners should do to deal with an impending county financial crisis only to be largely ignored by the Stark County public.

At their Canton meeting, nobody from the public turned out.  And it was common that only a handful, if that many, would show up over most of their meetings across Stark County.

With the beginning of the onset of the Occupy Wall Street campaign which started in lower Manhatten in New York City on September 17th, public apathy may be a thing of the past.

The SCPR's take on the "Occupy" participants is that they are very angry people.  In a comment to a Harvard Business Review article Anger as a Binding Force, in Chambers of Commerce and Elsewhere, (Robert J. Bennett, professor of the University of Cambridge, the U.K.) expresses in common man way the anger that is the heart and soul of the "Occupy" effort as well as the Tea Party movement, to wit:

Anger focussed (sic) in the right direction can be a powerful force for change. This is seen not only in Chambers of Commerce but diverse places like the Arab Spring, the feminist movement, and the Civil Rights movement.

Now if only we would get more angry about abuses of power in the corporate and political worlds and not just say "I'm as mad as hell and not going to take this anymore" but actually organize to bring about change. But this does not play well in political circles and on corporate boards.

What do we need? An American spring as seen in the Wall Street protests?

cedricj.wordpress.com
Inspiring leaders to inspire others

The Occupy Movement is now sweeping across the entire nation and will be coming to Canton this coming Saturday.

Micah Miller, who has lived in Canton since the late 1990s and is a graduate of Canton McKinley High School (2007) and in the process of completing undergraduate education at Kent State University Stark, has been energized by the events in New York (where he has connections) and decided to bring the Occupy Wall Street to the Hall of Fame city.

Here is Miller's press release:

In solidarity with the movement begun in New York known as #occupywallstreet, we are proud to announce that on October 15^th 2011, in coordination with demonstrations worldwide, #occupycanton will rally supporters in downtown Canton. #occupycanton, being a completely grassroots movement committed to participatory democracy, will hold this event with no affiliation to any political party or candidates for public office.

We are rallying to voice our opinions as the 99% of the population who are often left behind by an economic and political process which has been manipulated by unelected, unaccountable corporate interests.

The #occupycanton “People’s First Assembly” will begin at 12:00pm on October 15^th 2011 at Central Plaza Sout

The event is open to all people, of all political persuasions,  both blue collar and white, union members and business owners who feel that their voice is not being heard on Wall Street or in Washington DC.

All those who wish to speak will have the opportunity to do so. The First People’s Assembly will adhere to true democratic principles of self government. The event has gained momentum on Facebook and other social media outlets.

#occupycanton is part of a much larger movement of the 99% stepping forward to demand our voices be heard and that policy be carried out for the betterment of all people, not just the privileged few.

The rally in Central Plaza will be the first of the #occupycanton movement, not the last.

Miller says that he has heard from a number of public officials in response to his announcement and further understands that Canton Mayor Healy is supportive.  He says officials responding include Canton councilmen (the SCPR has spoken with unopposed Canton council candidate about his interest in supporting the event and has a copy of an email in which Plain Township Trustee Louis Giavasis takes an interest.

Miller was quick to tell the SCPR that should someone like Mayor Healy wish to address Saturday's assembly, he will have to get in line with everybody else who has something to say and take his turn.

It will be interesting to see whether or not Healy appears and if he does, will he be content to take his place in line?

If he does, such would be quite a switch for him as he reportedly demanded a front and center role at a 9/11 commemoration event held at the McKinley monument last month.

Could it be that Miller's effort might spark Stark County's citizens to shed their apathy and seize the day and become active participants in every level of Stark County local government?

Let's hope they are angry in a helpful way!

COMMISSIONERS BRISTLE AT TAXPAYERS RIGHT TO KNOW ABOUT THE CONTINUING PROBLEMS AT THE STARK COUNTY DOG POUND?

The SCPR has learned that the Stark County commissioners are not especially fond of The Report's focus on their, once and for all, getting a handle on the manifold problems that seemingly continue to plague the operation of the Stark County Dog Pound ("Pound," - SCDP).

The SCPR has been the main media outlet over the past couple of years that has been needling the commissioners (the current and past boards) about their seeming inability going back, perhaps, as far as ten years to shape up Pound functioning.

Apparently, the current commissioners get upset that Stark County's dog lovers come to The Report with their frustrations about perceived deficiencies in the operations at the Pound.

Understandably, the new members of the current Stark County Board of County Commissioners ("Board"), appear to think they have been dealt a bad hand on the matter of Pound operations by the immediately preceding Board (Bosley, Meeks and Ferguson).

However, Commissioners Bernabei and Creighton have now been commissioners for the better part of a full year and it is time for them to start owning up to their share of not yet resolving Pound personnel problems which seem to be the main gripe of Pound operation critics.

Commissioners Bernabei and Creighton made a great fanfare about a new day dawning in how commissioners - present, going forward - interact with the public and the press on accessibility, accountability, transparency and community outreach.

While the SCPR believes that the new Board is a considerable improvement over the Bosley-led Board, The Report is curious why the commissioners want to discourage public dialogue on the pace of their progress on reforming Pound operations.

The Report is getting the growing impression that much of what commissioners say about heightened transparency may be more rhetoric than reality.

The Report last published on the Pound problems on September 1st.  CLICK HERE to link up with that blog.

As the SCPR is prone to do, once an issue in presented - no matter what Stark County government entity is involved - is to check back with sources who have been critical to get an assessment of whether or not satisfactory problem resolution is or has occurred.

FIRST - 'THE OTHER PROBLEMS"

On Dog Pound operations, it appears that there is substantial continuing dissatisfaction, to wit:

• an overall assessment that Dog Warden Reagan Tetreault "is in over her head,"
• Because of criticism of Tetreault, Stark County Chief Administration has taken to micro-managing (The Report's interpretation) Pound operations,
• It is "hit and miss" as to whether or not dog cages get cleaned depending on which Pound employee has the responsibility at any given time notwithstanding Warden's September 23rd directive that the cages be cleaned each and every day,
• a continuing phenomenon whereby Pound volunteers are providing extra food,
• while Warden Tetreault has issued a volunteers manual, she apparently did so with an attitude (i.e. because she was "tired of hearing about it."),
• a continuing situation whereby capital (e.g. buying a new washer, dryer, and dishwasher at the cost of about $1,000) and supply purchases are made by Pound volunteers because, if they did not do so, needs would go unmet, and
• inadequate and inconsistent administrative processing dogs taken into the Pound resulting in dogs not being adopted and ending up being euthanized because of the Pound having more dogs than cages.

Critics do cite improvements such as dog food bowls being dumped every night so as to eliminate a mouse infestation problem.   However, the Stark County (Canton) Health Department is credited with the improvement on the basis of the filing of a complaint by Stark County Dog Pound Advisory President Nanci Miller back in July of this year.

SECOND, "EXCESSIVE EUTHANIZATION OF DOGS"

While it is agreed by various critics of the Pound operations that there is too much euthanization going on, there is disagreement as to whether or not Pound management (and ultimately the commissioners) is to blame for not developing strategies (e.g. an aggressive adoption program, et cetera) to cut down on the phenomenon or that the excess is owing to other factors such as citizens having to abandon their dogs because of the down economy and the Pound simply not having the capacity to deal with the increased number of dogs and which is not amenable to a solution other than stepped-up euthanization.

As far as the Stark County Political Report is concerned, Stark County's citizens should take the attitude that "the jury is still out" as to whether or not the current Board is "really" improved over past Boards in terms of accessibility, accountability, transparency and community engagement with the focus being on accountability and transparency.

When The Report hears that a certain commissioner does not want to be blindsided with SCPR blogs (generated because dog loving citizens come to The Report for redress of their grievances) about unresolved complaints about long overdue deficiencies at the Pound, then all the talk about accountability and transparency takes on more and more of a hollow ring.

Stark County citizens should be concerned that such is a "shooting the messenger-esque" reaction and, that despite all the talk to the contrary, that, perhaps, the commissioners really do not want to hear critical input from the citizens of Stark County.

STARK COUNTY LEGISLATORS: THE HANDMAIDENS OF THE OIL & GAS INDUSTRY? DAMNED BE LOCAL CONTROL!

Former state Rep. Todd Snitchler (R - Lake), John Hagan (R - Marlboro) and current representatives Kirk Schuring (R - Jackson), Stephen Slesnick (D - Canton) and state Sen. Scott Oelslager should never ever talk about the virtues of local government/local control in Stark County.

And if they have the brass to do so, they should be called out on it by whomever hears it.

For in various combinations of votes on Senate Bill 165 (2004) and House Bill 278 (2009/2010), they helped gut the ability of Ohio local governments to control what the oil and gas industry does in terms of drilling for natural gas by a process call hydraulic fracking.

A very well written letter on the topic was printed in the Akron Beacon Journal recently.  The writer, Dan Lincoln of the Northeast Ohio Gas Accountability Project (NEOGAP), submitted the letter to the SCPR for an encore publication.

With John Hagan, Schuring, Oelslager and Slesnick voting to strip Stark County's townships, villages and cities of their ability to fully protect "the health, welfare and safety of their residents, it is hard to see how how they can look the residents of Marlboro (Hagan), Canton (Slesnick), Jackson (Oelslager and Schuring) and, indeed, all of Stark County (Oelslager and Schuring) in the eye when they appear in public.

Undoubtedly, they say to their constituents that they are working hard as legislators.

But the SCPR adopts the words of one Michael Mouse (a community activist and council-at-large candidate in Canal Fulton), " I know know you are working hard, but who are you working hard for?"

In the case of HB 278 (2004) and SB 165 (2010), it is obvious that Messers Hagan, Oelslager, Slesnick and Schuring worked hard for the oil and gas industry interests; not for the authority of local government to fend for the health, welfare and safety interests of Stark Countians.

Here are their votes.